More ATI Driver News from Derek Smart

[Dave Baumann]

OK, now, everybody who wants to particpate in this thread lets please keep the responses civil - regardless of what may have been said before here. We've had enough flamatory remarks and outright swearing to cater for a years worth of B3D threads in this one alone. We're all adults, lets all try and act like it.

 

[hax]

][The POINT is that ATI have this bad track record, they're conceited about it, don't give a two hoots about it and THEN they send out incompetent fools like OpenGL_Guy to the gaming forums to give out a sense of commitment - when ALL they're doing is COMPOUNDING the problem by IGNORING that there IS a problem.

You like to twist things, don't you? ATI never sent anybody on to the forums. OpenGL_Guy came on at his own free will and has NEVER stated that he speaks for ATI. His opinions are his own. I also know him personally, and he is far from incompetent. You're making false accusations. Personal attacks against OpenGL_Guy are unsubstantiated, your emotions are getting the best of you and your statements are utterly false.

]Sure, I've said before that the ATI dev support crew (That would be Mike's crew) are very, very helpful, responsive etc etc (too bad they're not the ones in driver development) but this whole ATI driver development farce is really, truly at epidemic levels.

You do realize that the whole point of dev support is to schmooze. They are not technical folk. If they are so nice to you, why don't you CONTACT them AGAIN, instead of picking out a single individual on a forum who tried to help you.

You're example regarding the driver package does have a valid point, but again you are misfiring. People like OpenGL_Guy, who works on the code, don't handle the releases. Yes, the package is old, primarily because ATI doesn't publicly release driver packages that are not WHQL certified. That is about a month long process. Does it really matter that you had that package before it was certified, no, not really, because you were looking at the dev releases.

FYI, there are notes regarding the patch, you should probably read it. It is documented.

 

[Dave Baumann]

Even then, why not include that DLL in the 776 driver set? I mean, after all, when I ran a compare of the two 776 driver sets, they took the time to include new files and revise some files. Why not that particular DLL?

I think Randell already said it - WHQL certification takes weeks (if not months) so (assuming the new drivers are certified) they would have been submitted long ago, probably before the bug/fix was identified. Stalling the driver release for th new DLL would have meant a resubmission to WHQL which would have further delayed them. I wouldn't be surprised to see an interim 'beta' driver on the ATI site soone whilst the new ones are being certified.

 

[Derek Smart [3000AD]]

You like to twist things, don't you? ATI never sent anybody on to the forums. OpenGL_Guy came on at his own free will and has NEVER stated that he speaks for ATI. His opinions are his own. I also know him personally, and he is far from incompetent. You're making false accusations. Personal attacks against OpenGL_Guy are unsubstantiated, your emotions are getting the best of you and your statements are utterly false.

Hax, if you're going to quote me, please do from the ACTUAL text that I posted. You are obviously posting quotes from the original text that got the thread locked to begin with. I went back and read what I wrote and made the necessary revisions.

Play fair, ok?

 

[Joe DeFuria]

No, I DON'T GET the sense in doing this. At all.

Obviously. And you don't get it because you live in your developer cocoon, and are unwilling or unable to appreciate that there are processes in place by hardware vendors to release driver updates for a reason.

Why doesn't nVidia release every dev driver build to the public? Why do all the IHV sites bother with WHQL certification?

Because they don't want "Joe Average User" to download a driver, and get a message from Windows saying "WARNING! These drivers aren't certified..." in which case average joe user goes into a panic because he heard from his friend in the office who read a pience on CNN from some Linux guru about "gaping" security holes" in MS operating systems and therefore even looking at this uncertified message probably means his machine is already infected with a virus that will cause his machine to explode on April 1st...

 

[hax]

]Even then, why not include that DLL in the 776 driver set?

That's a good question, and there are answers. ATIs general policy is to only release WHQL certified drivers. That process takes approximately one month. The fix (i.e. the patch) was done at a later date, after the completion of 7.76 and it's submission to Microsoft. That's the functional model, and nobody on the dev team can affect that.

I agree, some people will miss it, and complain about it, as you have done. Like I said, driver devs have little say in this matter. We only write the code, we don't really control how it is released and when.

 

[Derek Smart [3000AD]]

]Even then, why not include that DLL in the 776 driver set?

That's a good question, and there are answers. ATIs general policy is to only release WHQL certified drivers. That process takes approximately one month. The fix (i.e. the patch) was done at a later date, after the completion of 7.76 and it's submission to Microsoft. That's the functional model, and nobody on the dev team can affect that.

I agree, some people will miss it, and complain about it, as you have done. Like I said, driver devs have little say in this matter. We only write the code, we don't really control how it is released and when.

I fully appreciate and understand that...

HOWEVER

It goes back to what I am saying, WHQL or not, this is the kind of confusion that creates dissent. I KNOW how the WHQL process works; but the fact is, a LOT of gamers are going to miss it. Why? Because a LOT of gamers just hit the NEXT button on that install screen, with the false impression that they've seen it all before.

 

[Althornin]

]
HOWEVER

It goes back to what I am saying, WHQL or not, this is the kind of confusion that creates dissent. I KNOW how the WHQL process works; but the fact is, a LOT of gamers are going to miss it. Why? Because a LOT of gamers just hit the NEXT button on that install screen, with the false impression that they've seen it all before.

Explain to me how that is ATI's fault.

 

[hax]

]Hax, if you're going to quote me, please do from the ACTUAL text that I posted. You are obviously posting quotes from the original text that got the thread locked to begin with. I went back and read what I wrote and made the necessary revisions.

Play fair, ok?

Derek, yes, I do play fair. I did quote you. What I was referring to was your attack on OpenGL_Guy, and the accusation that he was "sent" here by ATI. OpenGL_Guy speaks for himself only. What insights he gives, and what problems he takes on from these forums are in addition to his normal job functions. He is under no obligation to read or post to these forums. The fact that he works at ATI is just coincidental.

To make it clear. ATI does not send driver developers to the forums.

Now, I am quite removed (as is OpenGL_Guy) from developer relations. Most of us do not know what devrel has communicated to you, nor do we know what commitments, if any, they have made to you. The driver developers here do have a sense of pride in their work, and when OpenGL_Guy comes on, it is basically to see if there are any problems, and trying to come up with a quick resolution to it...before the official channels. There are bugs, yes, but OpenGL_Guy is just one on a team of many, and he does not work on all aspects of the D3D driver. He is also not the development lead for D3D, so what he does work on is generally not his decision, unless it is an extracurricular task. That would be working on a bug that is not officially logged.

I will urge you to please try and contact devrel again, maybe they can give you further insight into your bug reports. Even if OpenGL_Guy knew what the bug was, I do not believe he should comment on the inner workings of drivers on a public forum. There are things like trade secrets (or insight into the inner workings of drives) that can be determined from some of these posts...which is generally why I just stay out of it.

 

[ShadRox]

Im an old lurker. Im nobodys fan.

How much is this hurting Ati ?
I hope they dont ansver this.

How much is this hurting OpenGL_Guy ?
I kinda like him.

How much is this hurting B3D ?

All this hate.....
Dirty laundry....
I dont care. But it looks

I wote: ban and del the tread

 

[Joe DeFuria]

It goes back to what I am saying, WHQL or not, this is the kind of confusion that creates dissent...

True...the whole WHQL process has its disadvantages. But then, releasing tons of beta release drivers to the public also has its disavantages too. (Support nightmare.)

The point is, why are you continually bitching at ATI for this? You say that you can "appreciate and fully understand" the IHV position of WHQL. And we all agree that the whole process itself is not ideal in certain aspects.

Aside from not having the bug at all....how else would you have made the mafia fix available?

You could have either:
1) Do what they did:
Advantage: You always "install" a certified driver.
Disadvantage: You need to "repatch" it if you are one having certain issues.

2) Release a patch, but do not release any new certified drivers until the patch can be incorporated
Advantage: No "repatching" needed.
Disadvantage: Longer wait to have the other driver fixes and improvements.

3) Just release a new full set of non certified drivers
Advantage: No reptaching, all fixes incorporated
Disadvantage: No certification...

Now, as "power users", we would probably prefer number 3, because we don't care about some certification "label." But OEMs and the masses do....and guess who usually wins out?

 

[Derek Smart [3000AD]]

To make it clear. ATI does not send driver developers to the forums.

OK, we're clear on that and I stand corrected. As I said to you in my PM, I had no business including OpenGL_Guy in my missive about him being incompetent. That was blatantly out of line and I apologize. If that wasn't the case and hindsight hadn't kicked in (coupled with Dave's threat of kicking my ass) my post would still contain those words.

EDIT - now I realize that you were refering to a completely different post. I thought you were refering to my original diatribe! My browser must not have done the update when I hit it. duh!

I will urge you to please try and contact devrel again, maybe they can give you further insight into your bug reports. Even if OpenGL_Guy knew what the bug was, I do not believe he should comment on the inner workings of drivers on a public forum. There are things like trade secrets (or insight into the inner workings of drives) that can be determined from some of these posts...which is generally why I just stay out of it.

I agree 100%

Anyway, I'm on a holding pattern with dev rel and see no need to bug them further. I always send one email and wait for a response (which is always forthcoming). I already sent them one email, they acknowleged the issue and that it was being fixed. The next time I hear from them, will be about a fix. So, I'm going to wait and see what they come up with.

 

[Bigus Dickus]

]

As for you Fresh, I can see through all that Mabelline. Just ANSWER THE QUESTION : WHAT GAME HAVE YOU DEVELOPED?

My, so insistent when it comes to others' anonimity, but when it comes to background details about you (PhD) different rules apply.

I KNOW how the WHQL process works

Apparently not:

Even then, why not include that DLL in the 776 driver set?... No, I DON'T GET the sense in doing this. At all.

So, once again, you make a statement that shows either your (a) ignorance or (b) bias, and then later state that you knew all along. Perhaps you just forgot about the inner workings of the WHQL process when ranting about the patch? Or perhaps it was conveniently left out to help in your crusade against ATI's driver devs. In any case, how can you expect people to argue rationally with you when your very argument is as elusive as the table fog you bitch about... changing with every post, you redefining definitions and redefining what you said previously.

Talk about fuzzification... if there is such a thing.

 

[parhelia]

So I take it the new game you are working on will work fine on SiS Xabre cards as well as Trident XP4 ?

 

[Derek Smart [3000AD]]

Look, I know that common sense is a stretch for some of you, especially you - if your posts are anything to go by - but the fact is, WHAT does my post about the confusion that an updated DLL being missing from current driver set, have to do with HOW the WHQL process works?!?!?!

You think the gamer frigging cares about a WHQL process? I am talking about the CONFUSION that this is going to cause, ESPECIALLY given the fact that the particular DLL in question, is a CRITICAL update.

Get it now, dear?

WHAT is the matter with you anyway? Can't you at the very least TRY and make a SENSIBLE and PRODUCTIVE post?

So I take it the new game you are working on will work fine on SiS Xabre cards as well as Trident XP4 ?

work fine is subjective. If I experience problems I will report it, as always. What was your point?

 

[Joe DeFuria]

but the fact is, WHAT does my post about the confusion that an updated DLL being missing from current driver set, have to do with HOW the WHQL process works?!?!?!

I ask you again...if you were ATI how would you have handled it. I laid out several suggestions earlier.

And if you answer that, without considering "how the WHQL process works", then you are not "appreciating" the perspective of ATI or its other customers. That's what WHQL has to do with this.

You think the gamer frigging cares about a WHQL process?

Do you think ATI is only concerned about gamers who play 3 games / demos? Do you think the WHQL process might be in place to placate others who want some "stamp of approval"? (Whether or not that means anything in reality is a moot point. The point is, many ATI customers DO CARE about WHQL certification.) But you can't get past the hump that iyou believe "ATI is there to serve ONLY YOU AND THE HARDCORE GAMER that doesn't care about certification labels or being 'beta testers' for new drivers.

We all know that you, and/or hardcore gamers are at the center of the universe as you know it. It's fine to stick up for yourself and gamers. However, as much as this may shock you, ATI doesn't see it that way. Nor should they.

EDIT: The end result was a COMPRIMISE. They released new WHQL DRIVERS, and they made AVAILABLE a patch to fix the issue. Is that just so infuriatingly out of line? Apparently, you would be happy if ATI delayed the dll patch until after the new driver release, so that gamers wouldn't be confused by "repatching?" If that's what you think, you are truly out of touch with gamers.

I am talking about the CONFUSION that this is going to cause, ESPECIALLY given the fact that the particular DLL in question, is a CRITICAL update.

Oh, yes. "Dogs and cats...living together...MASS HYSTERIA!!"

Can't you at the very least TRY and make a SENSIBLE and PRODUCTIVE post?

Um...

 

[ExitiosuS]

"So, when Derek cusses and we cuss back, it's OUR fault for cussing, while Derek is blameless because it's his God-given right to cuss?"

Uhhh... Actually, that's taking it out of proportion. But, if you cuss back, why can you give him hell for cussing if you are doing it yourself? I believe you called him a hypocrit somewhere in here, well, not you yourself, but someone. Just don't place full blame on him for the cussing unless you're perfect. And personally, from what I've read and *think*, I doubt he had a chain around your neck forcing you to cuss, that's your reaction, your blame, and you've lost the right to get ticked about him cussing.

Sort of like someone killing your friend or something, and then they get away with it, and then you kill someone and your defense is, "But someone killed my friend and got away with it, charge him and not me!!!"

Maybe not exactly, but it's similar in a way. And don't reply back to this with a, "Oh, so that means Derek is an angel?" again, because that's just silly. I'll revert back to the kindergarten statement.

 

[ExitiosuS]

Oops. I didn't see your post Gerry, I just quickly defended myself! hehe. Sorry for being repetitive; I'm new. Lol

 

[ExitiosuS]

Now, for an actual post on the subject, (hehe)
Why are we concentrating so heavily on the WHQL process, again? I missed its significance somewhere within' the posts containing it. Heh. Personally, as a gamer, I could care less about it. I use leaked ATi drivers from God knows where and you always have to skip that crap. Do I jump up and down and have a hissy fit that it isn't certified? I think not. And do my friends? (which are not computer literate, so they don't really know what it is or anything, blah blah blah, not meaning to insult them) no, they don't. It's like asking how many people read an EULA? I don't know all too many people that read those, let alone care about another window. Not saying no one does, though....

Meh. What I said might have been irrelevant, if so, ignore it... Just trying to make a stance, here.

 

[KimB]

Well, I believe the people who are primarily concerned with WHQL-certified drivers are software companies (i.e. "We won't give technical support unless all of the drivers on your system are WHQL-certified"), businesses (Some degree of reliability when upgrading multiple PCs at once), and PC manufacturers.